Testing and Quality Assurance (Essay Sample)
A system is tested in several stages for test results to be manageable. Testing is done in blocks to facilitate developers and users’ review. This task is referred as system configuration management, which is a collection of system programs and modules delivered to the reviewers for results and feedback. Configuration management is a general technique to coordinate the testing process among developers and testers. During configuration management, it is important to control the system results and identify the differences between testing and design in order to monitor risk and minimize error. Techniques such as the Cleanroom testing stress precise planning and coordination within the team. Cleanroom can be expanded into running metrics and statistical calculations to measure testing accuracy and deviations. Acceptance testing involves many activities that require users and developers to collaborate to schedule testing cycles, find errors, and sign off on test results. Additionally, there must be a quick turnaround between finding errors, determining the causes, and correcting them to allow testing to proceed within schedules.
Delivering a system requires more than migrating the system into production. SE goes through one more step of product evaluation before implementation. This is done based on the test results and process evaluations through the CMM, ISO, and other quality models. Also, prior to deployment, change management activities must be conducted to introduce the new system to the user community and operators. Full training and documentation must be disseminated to acquaint everyone with system functionality and capabilities. Ultimately, a post-mortem analysis is done to ensure quality and software reusability.
After the system is implemented, the project team reconvenes to perform maintenance as needed. This phase also requires similar skills to the ones used in software development. The maintenance team continually interacts with software engineers, developers, and users to determine post-implementation issues and unanticipated system faults.
For Module 4, read Conger’s Chapter 17.
Conger, S. (2008). The New Software Engineer. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company [Global Text]. Retrieved from http://dl(dot)dropbox(dot)com/u/31779972/The%20New%20Software%20Engineering.pdf
Sommerville, I. (2011). Software Engineering. 9th ed. Boston, Massachusetts: Adison-Wesley. [Chapter 8: Software Testing PPT]
Sommerville, I. (2011). Software Engineering. 9th ed. Boston, Massachusetts: Adison-Wesley. [Chapter 24: Quality Management PPT]
After reading the course materials, please write a 3- to 4-page paper answering the following.
Suppose that a post-mortem analysis reveals that a particular developer is responsible for the major system problems in production. What kind of improvement activities would you recommend to ensure that these problems do not happen in future projects?
Length: Minimum 3-4 pages excluding cover page and references (since a page is about 300 words, this is approximately 900 - 1,200 words).
Assignment-driven criteria (25 points): Demonstrates clear understanding of the subject and addresses all key elements of the assignment.
Critical thinking (10 points): Demonstrates mastery conceptualizing the problem. Shows analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of required material.
Scholarly writing (5 points): Demonstrates writing proficiency at the academic level of the course; addresses the Learning Outcomes of the assignment.
Quality of references (4 points) and assignment organization (3 points): Uses relevant and credible sources to support assertions. Assignment is well organized and follows the structure of a well-written paper.
Citing sources (3 points): Uses in-text citations and properly formats references in APA style.
Testing and Quality Assurance: Post-mortem analysis
Project post-mortem analysis (PMA) is usually carried out to record the project activities which were highly effective and project activities which need adjustments for future projects. Project post-mortem report is aimed at informing future project teams of vital lessons that were learned during the project including the successes, challenges, obstacles, and how it could be done in a different way next time (Sommerville, 2011). For projects conducted in future to improve, it is necessary to learn lessons from past projects. In this paper, the kinds of improvement activities that I would recommend to ensure that problems revealed by post-mortem analysis do not occur in future projects are recommended.
Post-mortem analysis is a very common name utilized for retrospective analysis and is becoming more and more significant in software engineering projects. This is primarily due to the challenges and problems faced by software projects. Regrettably, problems and challenges in software development projects have become somewhat common. Many times, the causes for such problems are unclear. As such, knowing the cause of previous failures and success has become crucial for improving software development projects of the future (Sommerville, 2011). By using post-mortem analysis, project team members could describe what they have learned throughout the project and this could be utilized for future projects.
Supposing that a post-mortem analysis reveals that a certain software developer is responsible for the major system problems during production, the kind of improvement activities that I would recommend to ensure that these problems do not occur in future projects entails identifying the specific reasons as to why the software developer caused the system problems in production, and how software developers can avoid such problems next time. In essence, those system problems would be referenced to ensure they are not repeated in future projects (Conger, 2008). It is notable that one of the main purposes of post-mortem analysis is basically to itemize and identity the things that went wrong with the software development project so that they could be utilized as reference to make sure that any further efforts in project implementation, communication, and process would go on in a more efficient way in future projects.
In general, the improvement activities entail three key as aspects: (i) identifying what went wrong with the project; (ii) why did those things go wrong – what was the cause; and (iii) in what way can these problems be avoided in future projects (Conger, 2008). In this case, what went wrong with the project is that system problems occurred during the project. Even though the individual responsible for causing this problem is known – one software developer –, why he caused the problem is not known. Perhaps the problem was the lack of required skills and/or knowledge. Maybe the software developer was not well trained for the task of software development that he...
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
You Might Also Like Other Topics Related to animal testing:
- Mammalian SenescenceDescription: Senescence can be caused by environmental factors. For instance, it can be accelerated by overexposure to ultraviolet radiation...2 pages/≈550 words | 2 Sources | APA | Literature & Language | Essay |
- Proportions Description: Hypothesis testing focuses on assessing the validity of evidence depending on the null and alternative hypothesis...3 pages/≈825 words | 2 Sources | APA | Mathematics & Economics | Essay |
- Probability and Health StatisticsDescription: A hypothesis test evaluates the prediction about the probability of propositions about a population occurring while focusing on strength of evidence in statistical inference...3 pages/≈825 words | 2 Sources | APA | Mathematics & Economics | Essay |